Skip to main content

tv   News Politics and Public Affairs  CSPAN  January 6, 2013 9:30pm-11:00pm EST

9:30 pm
thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your attention and the ongoing work. thank you. >> the british house of commons returns after a break. wednesday, 7:00 a.m., on c- span2, and you can see prime minister's questions at its same time here on c-span. >> necks, the speech by syrian president bashar al assad, and then a discussion on the future
9:31 pm
of u.s. energy policy. at 11:00 p.m., "q&a" with timothy naftali, former director of the nixon presidential library. >> studentcam video and trees are now do, friday, january 18, for your chance at the ground prize -- the grand prize. for more information, go to >> in a rare address to the nation, syrian president bashar al assad talked about moving forward but made no mention of stepping down. he proposed a new constitution, which he said would have new laws. he thanked russia and china for their support of syria and stressed that his country would defend itself against outside forces. the last time the syrian
9:32 pm
president addressed was in 2012. this comes to was courtesy of aljazeera english. -- comes to us. >> and this is the first time since november that the president has given a public address in his own country. [crowd chanting] not so long after, it was said that maybe as many as 60,000 people have lost their lives in during the course of the 21- month conflict. while our translators are standing by to bring you -- president bashar al assad, live in the syrian capital. >> [speaking foreign language]
9:33 pm
>> members of the government, heads, and members of peoples, organizations, ladies and gentlemen. but today, i look at your faces and the faces of people of my country with sadness and pain. i look at the eyes of the children of syria, and i do not see an innocent smile on their faces. i look at the hands of the elderly and see them praying for their children, daughters and grandchildren. today, pain and suffering is spread all over syria. there is no happiness in any corner of the country.
9:34 pm
safety and security are absent in the streets and alleyways of the country. many women lost their children, the best of their children. families lost their carers, and many children became orphans. siblings have been divided between killed, missing. if this pain is spread over the country, the situation is not able to deal with what has been lost. food, medicine, and fuel that is lost in the country. from the pain, hope is born, and from difficulty, solutions, .
9:35 pm
the dark cloud would hide the sun, but it would have been it rain and cleanliness that will bring goodness to the country, and from the sadness and suffering and challenge and determination, it is a huge energy. syria will not come out of its impasse unless it changes this into a solution that will bring the country out of its in past -- impasse, which it has never witnessed in this region. there is no way we can remedy all of the injuries and deep wounds in syria, and this is the only way to keep syria politically more viable and to
9:36 pm
bring it back, especially morally and economically. everyone is responsible. however simple his role is. the country is ours. we defend it collectively. the situation is defense and the preparation -- preservation of people's property, to preserve the country as a whole, and every person knows exactly what is going on and the negativity of others will not sort out the problem and not bring a solution. not participate in providing solutions will bring the country back, and it will not help the
9:37 pm
country to come out of its difficulty. many have fallen into the trap the conflict is between holding the power and authority, and therefore, they stayed back and kept quiet and silent. therefore, it is our duty, all of us, to bring our awareness back so that people can use the compass in the right direction. it is a situation where defense of the country against its enemies, the difference between a man that tries for his bread and war and the safety that everyone wanted to have, and, again, spreading fear and court it among people.
9:38 pm
they kill the people in order to kill the light in our country. they killed the brains and the intellect in order to inflict ignorance on us. they attacked infrastructure in order to make our life difficult. they deprived children of their school in order to bring the country backward, and to suppress. they affect electricity and fuel so that they make the elderly and children suffer the ole miss of winter. their brutality is stealing their resources and food, in order to make people hungry, so it is a conflict. the authority to take the power
9:39 pm
of the country, to kill the people and fragments syria. these are the enemies of people. the enemies of the people are the enemies of god, and the enemies of god will be in hell in the day of judgment. they came with their false claims, and they were supported by media and money in secret. when they failed, they moved to a second stage. they claim to peaceful means, and they showed that they were armed in resorted to bombs. they began to attack countries, attacked the towns, attack them brutally. the more they attacked, the
9:40 pm
people stood steadfastly to show their falsehood. eventually, they resulted to terrorism to terrorize the people. they call it revolution, and it has nothing to do with any revolutions from here. every resolution -- revolution needs thinkers. who is providing thinking and thoughts for the is revolution? revolutions are based on scientific notions. they are to push countries forge, not to bring them back toward, in order to enlighten people, not to cut electricity. it is a revolution of people who live in the country, not people who come in from outside. it is the people's revolution, not outsiders. is this a revolution of the
9:41 pm
people? this is a bunch of criminals. those who use a religion in order to kill, collectively, and support to gangsters. every time the army stands hand in hand with the people, they come closer to their demise. however, they began to kill in the front lines, and they used bloodshed, and because the ideology of religious difference is new to us as something strange to us, and therefore, it we have terrorists that describe themselves as jihadists -- al
9:42 pm
qaeda. they lead terrorist organizations on the ground, and those who are armed on the front line, they move to the back lines in order to use looting and feeding -- feeding -- thieving, those who know nothing but the language of killing and bloodshed. we brothers fight against this. many of them are not serious. they came for sinister ideologies and false ideologies they called a jihad, which is very far from jihad and islam. the people we are facing are those ideologues from al qaeda.
9:43 pm
we know how they were sponsored three decades ago by the west and the arab the money, and, of course, after the demise of the soviet union, they went from afghanistan to hit people in the arab countries and the islamic countries, and they went to the west. they tried to get rid of them in afghanistan by different means and in iraq, and because of this, terrorism has infiltrated through western societies themselves. these events have come to the arab world, especially in syria because now the opportunity is available for them so that the number of terrorists can be increased in syria to turn syria into a land of you not, and therefore, they can get rid of
9:44 pm
two adversities. one is the terrorists, and the second is syria, and that causes concern to the west. another organization, i cannot remember the name, it issued a report a month ago to retreat from terrorist activities. this happened in east asia. this is true because they come now to syria, and they come now from western countries, and wherever they come from, whichever society they come from, it is them coming to syria which is dangerous. it is not impossible to defeat them when we have the courage and the will to deal with them. however, the infiltration is very dangerous, , and if they come and infiltrate our society, they will mutate our society.
9:45 pm
regardless of what difficulties and differences politically syria has, and otherwise, we would be falling into the trap of handing down to our children that syria, which we know as a society, not necessarily geographically -- however, this would also destroy our geographical being, and it would destroy any society they would infiltrate, which is a huge responsibility. we need to be united to stand against it. however, the crisis has got other dimensions. not domestically alone. it is clear to anyone who wanted to see in the region, there are those that are trying to weaken
9:46 pm
or demise syria. money, arms, and others by support and training. countries who are enemies. they have built themselves on occupation, and it is no stranger for us to see that, and others that wanted to dominate syria, and other countries trying to find a place in history that they never had. however, they wrote a history with the blood of arab people. however, the syrians are more stronger than them and will teach them a lesson. [applause]
9:47 pm
internationally, it is no secret that syria was and is still a free, sovereign place. it does not accept any trusteeship from anybody. [applause] this is what alarmed the west, and it still does, so they used internal events in order to take syria out of the political equation so that they get rid of this phobia that they have, and, of course, opposition is the same as others. however, the international society is not only limited to the west. however, there are also others like russia and china and many others that refuse interference in the sovereignty of other countries. this is based on their principles of helping other
9:48 pm
people to self-determination, and we would like to thank all of those countries. the first of all, syria -- china, russia, and iran, and all of these countries who fight against interference, and we are grateful to them and thank them very much. [applause] in the light of all of this, this long introduction, we cannot speak about solutions except if we take into consideration all of these factors, regionally and internationally. any process will not change any of this.
9:49 pm
factors cannot be a solution and would have absolutely no effect at all. we start internally. if the dispute was between opposition and boils, if it is, in the eyes of some, it is to do with loyalty and opposition, this would be on the basis to construct the country, not to destroy it. it would be about progression, not going backward. the difference between opposition and loyalty is, in turn, -- when it becomes from inside, being directed and used by outsiders, then it turns it into conflict, internal and external conflicts, and this would be occupation, political occupation, from outside, into
9:50 pm
the country, and that will, in turn, go to defending against outside influence by internal means. therefore, when we talk about outside, we do not mean where these people live, but we say where they put their hearts, minds, their loyalty, and their bidding and their finance. regardless where they actually reside, so some people are living abroad, but they defend their country. it is not the then opposition and being loyal or fighting. we are in a situation, a state of war with all of what the word means. we are fighting against external -- a vicious war, which is so
9:51 pm
dangerous, and it is much more dangerous and harmful in any traditional war, because we are used in order to implement their plots. syria, they are trying to use us to destroy our generations. unfortunately, by the help of some of us, and therefore, we have to defend our country and in power at them to repair the country internally. this is not going to change anything in the war, however it would strengthen us in order to face this challenge. some may think that reforms would sort out the problem. it is only a contributory factor. so reform is important to help hopes, because without it, it
9:52 pm
would not help. however, if syria were to resort to security, then they do not understand. we say reform is reforming with one hand and destroying terrorism with the other hand, and, therefore, when someone is subjected to attack and defend himself, which the person defending himself or used security means, so when the people defend the country and the country defends itself, they say they chose the security option. defending the country is a duty, is legal, and it is legitimate option, and if we decided to defend ourselves and used to
9:53 pm
the security option, it does not mean that we are -- i am sorry. i repeat. if we took the political option, it does not mean we do not defend ourselves, and if we took the political option, that means we need a partner that is able to enter into dialogue on the national side, but if we did not in the past take any partner, then that was our choice. if someone wanted to get married and could not find the right partner, or did not find any person that would accept him, that does not mean that this person does not want to get married. however, it means he could not find the right partner. from that, we have spoken about
9:54 pm
a security solution, but no one in the country said that we only opted for the security option. we did not refuse any political solutions. we adopted this from day one through dialogue, and we have encouraged anyone who came with political project, but with him can we debate? with extremists that do not understand or accept the language of terrorism and bloodshed? do we debate with people who receive their orders from abroad and listen to the outsiders and listen to them, when they know that dialogue is
9:55 pm
going to frustrate their plots, especially people from the region that know that by syria coming out of its impasse, it would affect them adversely, and therefore they use their financing in order to sponsor terrorism? and, of course, that shows their implication in bloodshed. or they use foreign powers. do we debate with those who are genuine people who are not talking to us with a pre- written description from outside. [applause]
9:56 pm
the west, which is the descendant of imperialism, and they use the policy of division and some additions. they start the dialogue, not us, because they used to give orders to those collaborators. we are sovereign, and we talk our language, and we have been brought up in dignity, and why would we listen to them and listen to their debates? [applause] accordingly, those who talk about only political solution would ignore totally these facts, so either they are ignorant of the actual facts, or
9:57 pm
they are using the language that helps criminals and those who are behind them sell their people and dealing with us in this manner. we do not accept that. some talk about a political solution only. a political solution. we have to deal with everything, political terrorism, and also an important factor, which is a social solution. in particular, the situation has become better because of the social solution because people are patriotic, and they came with initiatives, and they have made negotiations and mediated between farmers and locals, and this has given good results on the grounds. this, people do not have any
9:58 pm
program other than being patriotic, so if we look at the solution comprehensively, and we look at this politically, socially, and security wise, we still have to go back to our social basis. the social words. i would like to pay tribute to those people who have made achievements. i know some of them, and i met them directly. others, i have heard of, but i would like to pay tribute to these people and thank them and tell them that we are dependent very much on their initiatives. [applause] it may, from what i said, there is nobody to speak to. that is not true. on the contrary, we are always stretching our hand for
9:59 pm
dialogue. we would have a dialogue with anyone who differs with us politically and anyone who had any stance as long as their stance is based on principles and patriotism. we will speak with anybody who does not sell his country to foreigners so that we get the arab-syrian blood back to syria, and people have this blood that runs in their veins and those who are in the interest of syrian and dependents and interests, and based on our principles that looks after the stability of syria and the charter of the united nations, which respects the sovereignty of people and the integrity of their countries and not to interfere in their internal affairs, and them bleeding in
10:00 pm
the dialogue between syrians and the syrian people, and in order to get the stability back to syria, the political solutions will be as the first stage. firstly, the relevant country it to stop arming and financing people who are armed to conduct this terrorist -- these terrorist actions inside the country, also, military actions from armed forces to reserve their right to defend any private or public property. secondly, we find a mechanism in order to find a solution and also the borders. thirdly, the government will begin to have extensive contacts with all this spectrum of society, syrian society, in
10:01 pm
order to have a whole dialogue, the congress to have a dialogue with syrian people to sort the problem. second stage. firstly, the government would like to have a conference to have dialogue, a comprehensive dialogue in order to have a charter to protect the integrity of the country and condemn terrorism and preserve the integrity of the country. the country will come in order to specify the criteria for the second stage. a national charter to preserve the unity of the country and condemn terrorism.
10:02 pm
this charter is what is going to preserve syria in the future and its politics, economics. secondly, we will have a referendum. thirdly, we have an expanded government which carries out the national charter. fourthly, we put to the people, and the conference of dialogue to agree a dialogue for elections. anything to do with constitution
10:03 pm
and the law, we can say if in the conference dialogue the government can carry out whatever is agreed on. the third stage. firstly, a new government to be set up in accordance with the constitution. and also, we have a general congress to have reconciliation and give amnesty to everyone in prison. thirdly, to reestablish the infrastructure and compensate people who have suffered damages. also, talking about amnesty, the country can forfeit its rights. however, we cannot give amnesty on behalf of people because it is the civil right to.
10:04 pm
amnesty would be general, and only by this amnesty we can get into national reconsolation, when everyone forgives everyone else. these are the main features of the political solution, as we see it. these are only just the headlines that need details, which the government will begin to put details and expand on these points and put this vision in the form of an initiative. this would be followed up in accordance with the way it is laid down. we need to put every topic in its context. we live in times of falsehood and manipulation. this is something we do not do. it is done by them.
10:05 pm
we need to put these things in the right context and put the right definitions. some, when they see this vision, they think there is a return backwards from the security point of view. i would like to reassure everybody, as far as fighting terrorism, we will not stop fighting terrorism as long as we have even one single terrorist in syria. this does not mean we're going to lessen the fight on terrorism. [applause] [chanting]
10:06 pm
secondly, this vision, you could call it initiative vision. these ideas are aimed at everyone who wanted dialogue and everyone who wanted a solution. it is not for those who do not want or do not try. we try from today, we may find, for example, a lot of rejection from people who want to ask, why do you reject something that is not aimed at you in the first place?
10:07 pm
[applause] thirdly, any initiative that is proposed by anybody person or of the state, it have to be based on the syrian vision, not to replace what we as syrians see as a solution. any initiative has to be an initiative to assist what the syrians are going to do, not replace it. this is an initiative from the government. any initiative from outside it has to be coming in order to help and assist, not replace.
10:08 pm
we need not waste time on any replacements. if we ask, how can outside initiatives help us, there are two avenues. one, politically. two, counter-terrorism. we are capable of being without politics. anyone who wanted to effectively and practically help us, they can concentrate on stopping armed people coming into syria. these are the parameters they can work within. a country that is thousands of years old cannot be dictated to politically. [applause]
10:09 pm
fourth point, that we support any assisting initiatives coming from outside. we cannot accept any interpretation or construction of it unless it is to help syria, and therefore we can talk about the syrian initiative, which is the transitional period. when we talk about transitional period, we would want to move from where to where? do we move from a free country to an occupied country, from a situation of where there is a state to a situation of chaos? it has to be a national decision.
10:10 pm
the other situation, if there is no crisis, the situation of transition is always from one place into something better. any situation to do with any transitional process, what we're doing now -- i am sorry, i can say, these ideas to represent this moment of the transitional period. fifthly, an initiative we except would be because it is based on the assumption of sovereignty.
10:11 pm
and the initiative concentrate on this, and therefore, anything agreed inside or outside syria has to be decided by the people. even the national charter that can be done by the dialogue conference, it has to be done by people, referendum, and anything comes from outside or inside an idea, it has to be gone through referendum by the people. not the government, not the president, and no one else. obviously we show a kind of guarantee that these steps do represent people's conciliation and national reconciliation. this is simple talk, and is very clear.
10:12 pm
anyone who comes to syria and leaves syria should know that. syria accepts assistance, but does not accept oppression. anything you heard in the past or you hear from ideas, concepts, declarations from the media, officials, if there are things to do, to talk about, then be so just by soap bubbles. [applause] any interpretation of any topic that is outside syrian sovereignty is just no more than dreams. they can live in these dreams, but not to make us live in this.
10:13 pm
we can only live in reality. anything would have to come from the syrian reality and interests of the syrian people. [applause] [chanting] dear sisters, dear brothers, the country is above everybody. syria is over and above everybody. politically, it will be strengthened. we will defend its territory. the syrians are forgiven, but they will not give up their dignity.
10:14 pm
here are many people that came to fight against terrorism. some provided vital information that helped in order to frustrate planned terrorist actions against the people. those were fought against terrorists by defending their areas or even to demonstrate against the murderous, armed people, and those who died against this and those who fight side-by-side with armed forces in order to fight, to defend the different areas and towns, and the infrastructure. i would like to give one example in north syria. the brave men of this town, which is on the border of turkey, they stood for a number
10:15 pm
of days, defending against terrorist attacks. they managed to defend and defeat these terrorists that were coming from turkey. i pay tribute to them. [applause] some of them tried and were able to convince and forgive other people through national reconciliation, which has broken the road for these terrorists in order to cause divisions. they were able to bring harmony. if they are not outside us, we are not outside them. the country is not only belonging to those who live in it, but also those who defended
10:16 pm
it. those who defend it, and those who need it. those who have stood for the country when the country needed them, regardless of where they were. many people, regardless of what they did and despite the differences, they stood to give unreservedly for the country. others have defended the country and to stop the deceit that was attacking. they stopped the brotherhood, as was defined by the west, and they came with vicious hatred and ideology of division.
10:17 pm
it was only a spring for those who have plotted it and try to spread it. the blood of these martyrs is the epic that will defend this country and help defend our integrity and unity together. it will cleanse our country from the betrayal and deceit. it will keep our country and its humanity. this is a strong thing. when the country is victorious, it does not forget those who have exerted efforts for it. i salute those who deserve the best salute, which is the army. the syrian arab army. [applause] [chanting]
10:18 pm
i salute our officers. i salute our brave soldiers. [chanting] i salute the soldiers, warrant officers, and officers who have exerted their effort and have paid their blood for the country. i salute the armed forces who fought in the most vicious wars in order to preserve the safety and security.
10:19 pm
the armed forces that have stood fastly, and wrought an epic to keep the country and preserve the people with their honor and safety. every soldier who fought to defend the country, a victory to them and victory to all those who fought and died for the country. i salute every citizen who stood by the armed forces. ever won by his means, the names will be written -- everyone by his means, the names will be written with light and fire.
10:20 pm
they defended their countries and peoples. [applause] dear brothers and sisters, i know as you all know what the country is going through is painful. i feel like most of the people feel about losing loved ones and the martyrdoms. the fire of their hatred afflicted and affected all of us. i am included. i am one of the people. i will always be like this. i will go one day, but the country stays. [applause]
10:21 pm
the mothers who lost their children, their tears will be -- mercy for their children, and hell for those who have stolen the smile of their children. we will have -- syria will be stronger than it was. we will not give up our rights. we will defend syria internally. those who think we will forget palestine, we will continue as we always did. we will support resistance as ideology.
10:22 pm
it is not about giving up. we will stand by the palestinian people for their just cause that lasted for decades. all the sacrifices paid by the syrian people, this is the country, and people will not be in any position other than by the side of the palestinians. syrians will help the second homeland, and we have our duty towards them.
10:23 pm
the same duty we would have towards any syrian. our salute to every palestinian who stood by the syrians and by syria, and those who stood by us in the difficult situation. [applause] dear sisters and brothers, despite all the plots against syria and whatever the close ones before the strangers did for us will not change as, because what syria has is very profound, well established. syria runs in our veins. it tells the whole universe
10:24 pm
that we are steadfastly standing against this. persevering and challenging, it is something that syria has inherited. we will go with syria and take syria to a stronger, and we will go forward. we will not be intimidated by bullets or intimidation. we have the right. god is always with the right. and may god be with you. [applause] [chanting] >> our coverage will continue. president assad being greeted by his supporters at the opera
10:25 pm
house in damascus. they have been chanting, "with our soul and blood, we will defend you, assad." [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> debt kaiser health news senior correspondent talks about the taxes and fees americans face in 2013 as part of the affordable care act. is livegton journal" at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> we saw that congress failed to reach an agreement on cyber security legislation in 2012, as
10:26 pm
many would predicted. they remain very far apart. >> and another big issue is going to be implementing the incentive option -- there in the midst of working on that. some of the hot-button issues are unlicensed spectrum, wi-fi, the other amazing devices the tech sector is coming up with all the time. >> net neutrality is another big issue. it is not clear exactly how the court will rule. the d.c. circuit has been skeptical. >> can look at the major technology and telecommunications issues of 2013 with reporters who cover them. monday night at the clock on c- span2.
10:27 pm
>> what i like about the coverage is there a very thorough. almost every program is available on c-span. >> the debates on the floor as well as the hearings that you cover. subcommittees and major committees. >> she watches c-span on comcast. c-span, created by america's cable companies in 1979, brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> a discussion about the future of energy policy and u.s. energy independence. the president of shell oil company and the environmental defense fund discuss renewable sources. the use of hydraulic fracturing to drill for oil and gas and the potential of a carbon tax.
10:28 pm
>> our next session is on energy in 2013. we will have three panelists. the president of shell oil company, the president of the environmental defense fund, co- chair of the green and safe energy coalition and former governor of new jersey. the president of shell oil company -- [applause] >> thank you, daniel. it is good to see everybody here. i cannot start this conversation without taking a little bit of the space in terms of backdrop. where is energy demand going? this is a story that is more familiar to most everyone in the room.
10:29 pm
the population going up to 9 million by the middle of the century. doubling energy demand. there are huge numbers, the water phrase that has caught me. it is the equivalent of creating a new city of a million people every week for the next 30 years. when you think about the energy that is consumed by a city of a million people, imagine that type of growth in energy. how are we going to supply that level of energy demand around the world? you see these emerging economies becoming energy consumers for the first time. the prediction of four energy is going this enormous increase. -- of where energy is going is an enormous increase.
10:30 pm
we're doing a lot of interaction with other companies and stockbrokers -- thought provoke first period to these are very much connected. how to sort how we take these elements and have a positive impact on the coming decades. that is a big macro background. you can look at what is happening in north america and you can call it an energy revolution. the amount you see about the shell resources and i use the word "revolution" because it is having an amazing impact in the country and you hear the iaea talking about self-sufficiency and it is changing the dynamics and has impacts on geopolitics and the choices countries are
10:31 pm
making. so i'd be happy to go deeper into that piece. but if you broaden out from north america and take that same picture, one of the big questions for us now is will that revolution that we've seen in north america be replicated in other parts of the world with one of the first big questions out there being around china because china is exploring and we're helping china explore for these natural gas resources and other resources so that has enormous impacts on where the world goes. i think i'll cycle all the way back down to the specific topic of renewables so again, setting up for a conversation here. our personal view is renewables are critically important. everything you will hear me say does actually fit in more or less an all or the above energy strategy because we think that's what we need. our prediction, if things go very, very well is that renewables could supply somewhere on the order of 30% of the world's energy demand by the middle of this century. that would be growth we haven't
10:32 pm
seen anywhere in the world in any source of energy before now. but if we do it the right way, that's possible. i'll stop there. [applause] >> just a quick follow-up on that because the 30%, it may sound like a small sum, but it's an enormous growth rate from a very low base now would be and absolutely in a growing energy environment. which renewables in particular do you see having that sort of potential? is it wind, solar, wave, geothermal? >> the kind of numbers i'm talking about, you double energy demand in the world and supply 30% of it from renewables from say 1% or 2%. >> where will it come from? >> certainly wind is part of that, maybe solar -- there's some optimism there's in breakthroughs potentially coming there. i think ultimately hydrogen may be on the table as part of that answer. i will say all of these are
10:33 pm
important. all of these potentially fill some of that space. they all need additional technology applied to them and we have to come down the cost curve. it's always interesting to look at what we as a company do. i'll tell you our focus right now when it comes to the emissions space and the idea why we would push renewables, our focus is around carbon -capturing storage and around biofuels, particular types of biofuels that meet this low co-2 potential standpoint. and we have a wind business but to be perfectly frank, it's not growing very fast. >> i hope we'll come back to this but let's move on to our next prediction from fred krupp who has for 28 years been head of the environmental defense fund and has been a pioneer in harnessing and advocating harnessing market forces for environmental ends. fred. >> thank you. [applause] >> in 2013, i predict that this
10:34 pm
country will finally begin a long overdue conversation about climate change and that that will lead the emplet p.a. to put in place meaningful, common sense rules to reduce common pollution from the nation's biggest source of greenhouse gas pollution which is our power plants. hurricane sandy wasn't caused by climate change but made worse by climate change. the surge here in new york was higher because the oceans are higher. the winds of the hurricane were speedier because the oceans are warmer. so we've got to attack power plants and reduce the carbon pollution from them, which not only causes climate change but also things like asthma and cancer. we also have to attack fossil fuel subsidies, in my view, subsidies for the fossil fuel
10:35 pm
industry now outweigh renewal subsidies by 75-1. we've got to level the playing field so clean energy has a chance to compete. in the meantime, we've also got to increase r&d for clean energy and preserve the limited subsidies that we do have such as the production tax credit for wind power. i also predict that 2013 will be the year when we begin to finally modernize our electric grid which is incredibly antiquated. we saw again in hurricane sandy that a few places in new york city like co-op city, were able to become islands of power and keep their lights on, while other places like n.y.u.'s hospital had to evacuate patients. the reasons that more of the city wasn't resilient and able to keep the power on again is because of antiquated policies that we need to change. so that if you have solar panels on your house, not only
10:36 pm
should you be able to feed them into the grid, but when the grid goes down, you should be able to use them to keep the lights on and all sorts of decentralized power production should be facilitated by the rules not only here in new york state but in all of our states, and i think this will be the year when we begin to get the policies in place to do exactly that. [applause] >> i just wanted to ask you quickly, you mentioned sandy a couple times. and events like sandy, what sort of impact does that have on the -- if you, like your members, the interest and engagement in the sorts of issues you're involved in? >> well, i don't think i can overstate how much it galvanized people. i think people saw an opening
10:37 pm
to talk about this issue that had been swept under the rugby politicians and others, neither the president nor romney talked about climate change during the election. suddenly people began to talk about the issue which was good. mayor bloomberg here, his endorsement on the president in part on climate change. so i think the storm, the prolonged drought affecting our nation's crops, they don't change everything. it doesn't mean we've won the battle but do open up the conversation from which we can begin to make the changes that we desperately need to make. >> good. well, again, we'll come back to issues around that. but let's hear the last set of predictions from governor whitman who was, of course, the head of e.p.a. under george w. bush. and also the -- prior to that
10:38 pm
the 50th governor of the state of new jersey, governor of the state of new jersey, as you will know, has more powers in the state, i think, than any other governor. it's a very important position. and now she chairs the clean and safe energy coalition. [applause] >> thank you very much. in making predictions about 2013, that's a dicey proposition. the chances of getting anything right in this day andage are becoming more and more difficult. but one of the things i will say is you have the department of energy calling for a 22% increase in power demand by 2035 in this country. that, as head of our utility can tell us, is yesterday for the utilities in making some decisions. what do i see for the future? frankly, i think fred is right, we'll see an increased stugs on the issue of climate change and it's going to be driven by the
10:39 pm
private sector and the state governments. the private sector, state and local governments have been, frankly, the laboratories of democracy. and you are going to see projects and new regulatory schemes come forward, more apt to see them come forward from the state and local level, reference to mike bloomberg in talking about the reaction to sandy. look at what governor kristi is going to have to face. we'll have to face in jersey on the shore. all of that is going to drive the ability to start talking about reducing our emissions and that's going to get us to climate change. i don't think we'll get to climate change with a discussion on climate change and seen an unwillingness on many parts of the congress to take that up. what the utilities will have to look at and what we'll look at for energy is frankly going to be a mix. it's not an all-of the above strategy which is frustrating to all americans and nobody does it better than us, when we're told we do this one thing everything will be ok. there's no such one thing for
10:40 pm
energy. it's going to demand all of them and has to be part of an overall understanding of how climate fits into that and that fits into national security and fits into our fiscal health, the fiscal health of this nation. i believe you're going to see more emphasis on renewables. you're going to see more emphasis on green power. nuclear is going to continue to play a role and with the department of energy having just issued its first agreement, public-private partnership to develop small, modular reactors. that's going to help us move along because frankly, you can locate those in places where the infrastructure isn't set up to handle a big reactor, but if you're looking for base power, it's 24/7 that doesn't release regulated pollutants and nuclear will be part of that discussion. we need to start with conservation and i believe because of the pressure that utilities are going to have, because of the pressure the private companies are going to have, that insurance companies face right now because of what they're having to pay for sandy
10:41 pm
and the destruction of sandy, they're going to bring the pressure and create the kind of climate that will allow congress, hopefully, to act, those would be my predictions for this year. [applause] >> i'd like to pick up on what you said about new jersey, first of all, before we go to a broader discussion on energy. new jersey in 2013 almost challenges, as i'm sure as a former governor, you'd be monitoring that very closely. what can the state do about this devastated shoreline given that it relies so heavily on tourism? >> well, it's going to be a huge challenge because tourism is our second largest industry in the state and that that is largely along the jersey shore and that's just not going to be back where it was. we're goingo rebuild by my hope is we would rebuild smart in a sustainable way and the governor will oversee that, has
10:42 pm
appointed someone. and the lieutenant governor has the plans under her purview. and between the two of those, my hope is i understand, we want to rebuild those communities and many have been there for decades and people have grown up and spent their entire life coming to the shore. we won't be able to rebuild them in the same way and won't be able to continue to rebuild because we'll see more of these storms. this wasn't just a one-off. >> we have limited time but enormous territory to cover. one place to start i think is the amazing revolution that seems to have crept up in america through energy through unconventional gas and oil and the reports are that america in a few years could become the world's largest oil producer overtaking saudi arabia and russia. what are your implications from your various perspectives? marvin, do you see energy
10:43 pm
independence by the united states in north america in the very near future? >> what's becoming clear is the resources that would enable that would appear to be there. whether or not it's the right thing to do or whether or not it's the u.s. who chooses self-sufficiency is a different question. one of the things that i would have liked to predict is in 2012 the u.s. would have a energy policy and have an energy strategy in this country. clearly that will involve developing the natural gas and these unconventional oil resources. how much will largely be a matter of policy. >> and fred, from your point of view, are you relaxed about this whole upsurge of the cracking energy, it seemed to have happened so fast. or in other parts of the world there are very big misgivings about it. france has temporarily banned it and so on. >> relaxed is not the word i would have chosen.
10:44 pm
[laughter] >> this has become a extraordinarily contentious issue. one of the reasons it's been contentious is there are impacts on the communities and too often up until now many companies have -- shell is an exception to this. but many companies have denied there are any impacts. so the community sees their water contaminated, not necessarily by fractures, but by spills on the surface or wells that haven't been drilled properly and cement casings that fail, communities see their water getting contaminated by natural gas operations. industry says it's not the fractures. i visited in washington, pennsylvania, 30 minutes south of pittsburgh, as part of president obama asked the secretary to appoint seven of us to chart a safe path towards
10:45 pm
us for shell and visitted a woman who was told by our commission who she had been forced to abandon her family farm because of the noxious emissions from the neighboring wells. her son, in order to continue to go to school was living with a neighbor. she was living out of her car. no one in this country should be forced to trade their health for cheap energy. the good news is that we are beginning to see states, mostly the states, begin to put the rules in place to protect communities and to protect the public health. that is critical to e.d.f.'s involvement in this issue. we are going to frack a lot of shell and other formations. it's just a fact of life. 90% of oil wells are being hydraulically fractured. we've got to get tough rules in place that protect folks. the last thing i would say on this is that there is another issue that in addition to these local impacts is very serious and hasn't been paid much
10:46 pm
attention to, and that's the global issue of fugitive methane, natural gas, mostly methane. these fugitive emissions from the wells, from the pipelines, if you have over 3.5% emissions, actually when you use natural gas instead of coal , that would be worse for the climate than coal. e.p.a. thinks we're 2.5% but nobody really knows, so shell and several other companies are joining with us to go out and measure what the emissions are. while i'm at it, i not only want to thank shell for being willing to cooperate on getting to the science. but as i told marvin before we stepped out onstage, in colorado, you know, just repeatedly now, shell has been there calling for stronger regulations of its own industry, agreeing with e.d.f.
10:47 pm
on how to go forward in a way that really is very meritorious. so i just want to thank you, marvin, for what shell is doing on this topic. [applause] >> you mentioned the -- that there would need to be a mix of energy. you mentioned nuclear. is there a danger that the extraordinary growth of unconventional gas and oil in america creates a sense of abundance and no longer a need to worry about renewables that marvin talked about, and nuclear, for example? >> it's certainly having an impact on investment and research and development, there's no question about it. it has slowed down. we were something like 17 nuclear reactors being considered just to keep us at 20%. nuclear is 20% of our world power mix today and that's backed off. we have four being built in the country. but you see that happening.
10:48 pm
the thing we have to worry about, again, is putting all our eggs in one basket. we've been here before where natural gas was a very low cost. and then we saw the prices spike. it's not necessarily where you want to overinvest. we also don't know, there you're missions in fossil fuels. as we look at the issue of climate change and the need to control our greenhouse gases, we need to look at all those other forms of power that can give us the ability -- i'm not sure i'd say we would be energy independent because energy is fundingent and moves around the world but are dependent on countries that don't like us and will have an impact, frankly, on our international policy and what we do in the middle east which of course is a grave concern to many, many people and as well it should be. so right now the cost of natural gas is certainly having an impact on decisionmakers, of where you put your money and how fast you develop but i think the utilities have been
10:49 pm
down this path before to the degree they understand it is going to be a mix and they'll need a mix and others do invest in other forms of power just beyond the natural gas. >> quickly because we want to have time. >> not to disagree with what's being said, but i think someone who has been in this industry the last 30 years, and is actually a skeptic of resources and claims about how big they are and so forth, i will tell you i think the natural gas resources that have been found in this country are different than what we've seen ever before. and to go to fred's point, if we do this the right way and these resources won't get developed if they're not done the right way. but if we do it the right way, it's a new world than what we've seen in the past. >> questions. i've been a bit biased towards this side of the room. so let's have this side of the room. >> my question is, do you feel like the private sector could respond well to a policy designed to reorient their focus around developing cleaner
10:50 pm
forms of energy production, specifically something like a cap and trade or revenue neutral carbon taxation plan, and what would that response look like? >> i can take a first stab at it. there are others who are more directly involved with it than i am. but clearly the utilities are going to see a demand and a need. right now companies are seeing more and more shareholder proposals, every annual meeting, asking them to benchmark their carbon footprint. and those are getting greater and greater votes. companies are now seeing the ability to reduce their carbon footprint, the ability to reduce their reliance on water as good marketing tools and a way to distinguish themselves from others. that's a positive reinforcement. so they can see there is going to be actually some advantage to making these kinds of investments as they move forward, and i think that's a very good sign. we're going to see more of that, more attention to those things because that's what
10:51 pm
their shareholders are starting to care about as they look at the overall economic impact they have from superstorms like sandy and the potential these have been influenced by the climate changes we've been seeing. >> let's take a few more questions. one at the end of the row. >> i read about risk management and insurance, and believe it or not, for us climate change is a really important topic because due to the drought and sandy and big storms, it's something with the insolvency of insurance companies and the ability to offer affordable coverage. and we have been speaking to a lot of regulators, washington, new york, colorado, who agree climate change is something we really need to put forward with the national agenda. but at the same time, for an
10:52 pm
article i was speaking to, the executives at a wind turbine manufacturing company. and the next week i spoke to them and they lost half of their work force. so we really do need to -- we really do need to think about the swache to alternate utilities but at the same time the state of those companies isn't very strong. do we need to put the agenda forward first or do we need to develop strong, alternate energy companies first? >> maybe just take a quick initial stab at it because i think i can tie these two together. from a private sector standpoint, i think taking advantage of the opportunity of this right in front of us which is using market mechanisms to drive a change in the mix over time through a price on co-2. in my mind, clearly through a cap and trade system because it lowers the cost to everyone overall but even if it took
10:53 pm
form as a carbon tax, there are other ways to get there. is the important first step, if you want to shift the energy mix because then you get the full wave of all of that drive, investment, technology and so forth moving in the right direction. i think it's more important than taking what feels like a little more one-off, trying to hit the specific sectors, as it's just a smaller step and a harder way to get there. >> let's take another question. we have very limited time. in the middle of the back there. >> marvin, shell obviously is driving the the push into the arctic. can you talk about some of the environmentally sustainable things you're doug there? and fred, if you could talk about what you think about the developing the arctic from e.d.f.'s point of view. thank you, gentlemen. >> really hard to do in 30 seconds. let me give a shot at it. we have to find a way to have a longer conversation.
10:54 pm
first of all, it means you have to do the development part right. you have to be efficient in how you use energy and the equipment you use and so forth. you have to do it in a way, this is the long story behind it in terms of protecting the environment when you explore for and ultimately reduce resources from a place like the arctic, the drive behind is the belief that the world will need these energy resources, something like a 1/4 of the world's energy resources from an oil and gas perspective are in the arctic. so that's the -- in such a short period of time, that's really all i can tell you, it's all about doing that right, it's about the scrutiny from regulators and n.g.o.'s and outside parties about whether or not we're doing it the right way but that's what supports the program. >> obviously the arctic, i've been north of the arctic circle a couple of times and it's a very fragile and precious place and more of it is becoming accessible, sadly, to the melting ice. so we've got to be extremely
10:55 pm
careful there because oil doesn't break up as fast if it spills as it does in warmer ecosystems. those who think a lot about climate change, it's pretty easy to be depressed. it's pretty doom and gloomy when you see how fast this is coming on. it's coming on way faster than the scientists who work for me thought it would. capitalism, when it doesn't have companies aaccount for the internal cost like the climate pollution, is what is driving this. we're here, the economists he -- it's what the economists call exernalities. >> you think we could have a carbon tax in america, for example? >> you know, not -- i would like to see a price put on carbon linked to a cap on carbon that guarantees that we
10:56 pm
have reductions. to me, the trick isn't what the price is, the trick is we've got to get a system in place that mandates reductions. but that's why i'm hopeful because when we try capitalism and put the incentives in place for solar and wind power and geothermal have a level playing field, watch what happens. and in the rest of the world, in the european union in china, 250 million people live in provinces trying cap and trade. in australia, cap and trade, new zealand, cap and trade, south korea implementing a carbon system. we're moving in more and more places to a place where we do what marvin and the governor have called for, where we use capitalism and get the incentives right which we haven't until now done and that makes me hopeful because entrepreneurs harness and
10:57 pm
prevent what we need to do have a clean planet can give us a clean planet. >> final thought? >> i would echo what they say. the economic drivers are there. i do think it is going to happen at the state level. you already see california as doing a carbon auction. it's going to be the states that are going to drive it as well as the multinational companies that want to have regimes in place that are harmonized with europe and europe and the rest of the world are moving ahead of us as far as addressing the issue of carbon and carbon emissions and makes it difficult for companies to do business across country lines because they're subject to penalties by not meeting some of the requirements of other states and puts us into a very difficult position. so hopefully those are going to be the drivers that are going to get us there. i don't see much appetite for a carbon tax. we don't seem to like tax in any way, shape, or form. so i don't know but that's a clean way to do it. >> your party may have advocated it.
10:58 pm
>> not all of my party. >> anyway, we'll have to leave it there. thank you very much for a fascinating discussion. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corps.201] >> tomorrow night at 8:00 p.m. eastern supporters of the occupy movement discuss the future of the movement. at 9:30, lynn rothschild talks about ethics in business and opportunities for women and youth unemployment. and at 10:00 p.m. eastern, google chairman emmitt schmidt talks about the role of the internet on society including health care and energy, that's tomorrow night beginning at
10:59 pm
8:00 p.m. on c-span. >> i think cybersecurity remains the top priority because of its natural implications. we saw congress failed to reach an agreement on cybersecurity legislation in 2012 as perhaps many would have predicted. they remain very far apart because industry is very opposed to any cybersecurity standards. >> i think another big issue is going to be implementing the incentive auction to create more spectrum so the f.t.c. has its sleeves rolled up and is in the midst of working on that. some of the hot button issues on that are unlicensed spectrum, you know, that power is i would phi and the other amazing devices the tech sector is coming up. >> net neutrality could be an issue. the d.c. circuit is considering verizon's challenge to the verizon's challenge to the f.c.c. rules.


disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on